2. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in light of the following circumstances: (a) although the defendant's mistake was recognized, and the defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor due to larceny, etc. in 2006, and the execution of the sentence was completed, it appears that the defendant's wrong judgment was made to bring about the crime of this case again for the purpose of raising hospital expenses for his family; (b) immediately after the crime of this case was committed, the money and valuables were arrested and seized, and the victim was temporarily returned to the victim; (c) however, considering the sentencing conditions favorable to the defendant, the court below reduced the amount of punishment against the defendant who habitually and repeatedly committed the crime of this case without being familiar with the execution date of imprisonment and one month after the end date of the punishment; and (d) the sentence was sentenced to the lowest statutory penalty amount equivalent to the punishment; and (e) the motive and background leading up to the crime of this case; (e) the defendant's age before and after the crime of this case; and (e) the defendant's occupation and behavior, family relation, etc.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

(However, in the decision of the court below, it is clear that the phrase "use of evidence Nos. 11 through 13, and 15 from the defendant" in the decision of the court below is an error of "use of evidence Nos. 11 through 13, and 16 from the defendant", and thus, it is corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.